Hallo, With the advent of clang 4.0 I would like to run the Gambit benchmarks[1] so as to compare with GCC 4.7. Is there an easy/convenient way to download and run the benchmarks? [1] - http://www.iro.umontreal.ca/~gambit/bench.html Cheers, -- -alex http://www.artisancoder.com/
The benchmarks are in misc/bench.tgz . After untaring the file, you will have the benchmark sources and some scripts to run the benchmarks and generate HTML tables of the results. I'm not at my computer now so I can't give you more details. Marc Sent from my iPhone On 2012-08-02, at 4:09 PM, Alex Queiroz <asandroq@gmail.com> wrote:
Hallo,
With the advent of clang 4.0 I would like to run the Gambit benchmarks[1] so as to compare with GCC 4.7. Is there an easy/convenient way to download and run the benchmarks?
[1] - http://www.iro.umontreal.ca/~gambit/bench.html
Cheers, -- -alex http://www.artisancoder.com/ _______________________________________________ Gambit-list mailing list Gambit-list@iro.umontreal.ca https://webmail.iro.umontreal.ca/mailman/listinfo/gambit-list
Hallo, On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 8:06 AM, Marc Feeley <feeley@iro.umontreal.ca> wrote:
The benchmarks are in misc/bench.tgz . After untaring the file, you will have the benchmark sources and some scripts to run the benchmarks and generate HTML tables of the results.
Doh! I searched for them but clearly I did it poorly. Thanks for pointing me to the scripts. I have run some benchmarks and it seems that GCC still is better at compiling Gambit-C code. Cheers, -- -alex http://www.artisancoder.com/
Could you report your findings? Marc On 2012-08-03, at 3:00 PM, Alex Queiroz <asandroq@gmail.com> wrote:
Hallo,
On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 8:06 AM, Marc Feeley <feeley@iro.umontreal.ca> wrote:
The benchmarks are in misc/bench.tgz . After untaring the file, you will have the benchmark sources and some scripts to run the benchmarks and generate HTML tables of the results.
Doh! I searched for them but clearly I did it poorly. Thanks for pointing me to the scripts. I have run some benchmarks and it seems that GCC still is better at compiling Gambit-C code.
Cheers, -- -alex http://www.artisancoder.com/ <bench-r5rs.html> <bench-r6rs-fixflo-unsafe.html> <bench-r6rs-fixflo.html> <bench-r6rs.html>
Hallo, On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 4:35 PM, Marc Feeley <feeley@iro.umontreal.ca> wrote:
Could you report your findings?
I tested GCC 4.7.1 from MacPorts and Clang 4.0 from Xcode 4.4. This machine is a Macbook Pro running OS X 10.8, has a Corei7 at 2GHz with 8GB of RAM and a SSD. I used the following options for both compilers: -Wno-unused -Wno-write-strings -O3 -fno-math-errno -fschedule-insns2 -fno-trapping-math -fno-strict-aliasing -fwrapv -fmodulo-sched -freschedule-modulo-scheduled-loops -march=core2 -mssse3 -fomit-frame-pointer -fPIC -fno-common -mieee-fp Clang complained about '-fmodulo-sched' and '-freschedule-modulo-scheduled-loops' but proceeded anyway. GCC built Gambit-C at around 6m and Clang took 14m. GCC also built the benchmarks noticeably faster. It seems that Clang uses a little less memory now, because I also tested building Gambit-C with 'make -j 4', and the system did not start swapping. The benchmarks timings were annexed to my previous email. Cheers, -- -alex http://www.artisancoder.com/
On Fri, 2012-08-03 at 08:06 +0200, Marc Feeley wrote:
The benchmarks are in misc/bench.tgz . After untaring the file, you will have the benchmark sources and some scripts to run the benchmarks and generate HTML tables of the results.
I'm curious, does Clang+LLVM use computed gotos like gcc does? Brad
Hallo,
I'm curious, does Clang+LLVM use computed gotos like gcc does?
Yes. Clang tries to support all GCC extensions. -- -alex http://www.artisancoder.com/
participants (3)
-
Alex Queiroz -
Bradley Lucier -
Marc Feeley